Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

LocalDB vs SQL Server comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

LocalDB
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
17th
Average Rating
9.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SQL Server
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
266
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Relational Databases Tools category, the mindshare of LocalDB is 2.8%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SQL Server is 21.4%, down from 23.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Relational Databases Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Srini-Dhanaraj - PeerSpot reviewer
The database always has structured data, like rows, columns, and bases
LocalDB is an excellent solution for learners, beginners, and projects of negligible size; it is very good. Any startup can use a local database to start. Once they grow beyond its limits, they can migrate to a MS SQL server that's also available on-premises. I rate it ten out of ten.
Kapil Dev Khatri - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps monitor queries and identify which indexes need to be created in the databases
SQL Server is very simple due to its GUI, which is available for users. It allows for modifications and has execution plans available, along with options such as activity monitoring. This helps monitor queries and identify which indexes need to be created in the databases, tables, or columns to improve performance.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The solution is fast."
"The initial setup was simple."
"The most valuable feature of LocalDBis the connection between the application and DB."
"LocalDB is an excellent solution for learners, beginners, and projects of negligible size; it is very good."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. The guidelines are very easy to follow. Maintenance is very easy and requires very little manpower."
"The solution can be deployed in a few minutes."
"It is easy to use and easy to perform a backup."
"SQL Server Profiler makes finding and debugging easy."
"It will do clustering, so you can have two database servers looking at the same data simultaneously."
"Its speed and the ease of server management are valuable. If I compare Microsoft SQL Server to MySQL, what I like in Microsoft SQL Server is the speed. We are using Microsoft Management Studio for managing our Microsoft SQL Server, and the user interface that I get to work with is also better."
"The most valuable features for database management in SQL Server are SQL Server Management Studio and Visual Studio Code with its administration capabilities."
"SQL is very easy to manage."
"We've found it to basically be pretty problem-free."
 

Cons

"The internal connection features of LocalDB could improve."
"The ALM features can be improved, but the database by itself is reliable."
"The solution needs to create a management tool. Right now, the solution has tools for creating a local installation, but it's too simplistic. We need something that's a bit more complex so that we can extend the tools with our scripts."
"It is only for a small amount of data. Local DB is made for the purpose of small-volume optics."
"The initial setup is complex and requires a skilled person."
"Its security can be improved. When you look at the Windows environment, it isn't the most secure environment. It is exposed to so many attacks. They continuously need to improve the security of the platform on which it sits."
"Our biggest problem with SQL Server is latency. The communication between the cloud and the on-premises environment is slow. The data needs to be encrypted for security, and you have to exchange data certificates between environments. You can adjust the configuration to improve performance, but it would be nice if SQL Server had some templates to resolve problems."
"SQL could be improved by making all features available on the on-premise version of the product as well as the cloud version. When you buy the on-premise version, it's sort of an inferior product compared to the cloud version, which seems to get most of the latest and greatest features."
"The pricing could be more affordable."
"I would like the SQL Server to be able to provide cloud support. We use the solution with a Korean provider supporting only MySQL rather than Microsoft SQL Server, which would be preferable and cheaper. This would prevent us from having to pay for troubleshooting and hosting the server."
"SQL Server could be improved with cheaper licensing because it's very expensive."
"In terms of what could be improved, everything on-premise is now moving to the cloud. Obviously SQL Server has also moved, because Microsoft Excel has its own cloud called Azure Finance. Every solution comes with its own advantages and disadvantages."
"The tool is expensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The fees are fair."
"The licensing cost is too high for LocalDB."
"The product is expensive."
"The price of SQL Server could be reduced, the license is expensive. We have an annual subscription."
"The licenses are really expensive. Their licensing model should be more simplistic."
"This is a downside of enterprise Microsoft products."
"We did a one-time payment. Its price, in general, can be reduced."
"Pricing is reasonable for small organizations, but the scaling increases the price."
"There is a license required for this solution."
"​We are a Microsoft shop, so we use Active Directory. That integrates well with this product, but we did look at Oracle. We also looked at IBM. This was the best price point for us for what we were getting.​"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Relational Databases Tools solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
10%
Educational Organization
50%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with LocalDB?
Technically speaking, you don't need to get any updates because it's not online. It's on-premise. So once it is installed, then you get a desktop-grade version. But the purpose of LocalDB is not th...
Would you say the price of SQL Server is high compared to that of similar products?
SQL Server is fairly priced because it has various editions, depending on the number of users, servers, or core packs you are using. If you compare the product to others in this category, the price...
Has using SQL Server helped your organization in any way?
SQL Server has helped my organization through partitioning to distribute the workload, as it splits them up into smaller pieces so the machines can easily deal with it. However, this comes with a h...
Which authentication mode is best for SQL Server?
My company connects through SQL Server authentication. We have company Windows accounts, but we do not want to connect the two, out of security concerns and to keep things separated for our own pur...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Microsoft SQL Server, MSSQL, MS SQL
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AstraZeneca, Kienzle Automotive GmbH, Kodak Alaris, Unilever, Floatel International and Kongsberg Maritime, MyHero
Microsoft SQL Server is used by businesses in every industry, including Great Western Bank, Aviva, the Volvo Car Corporation, BMW, Samsung, Principality Building Society, Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield, and the Catholic District School Board of Eastern Ontario.
Find out what your peers are saying about LocalDB vs. SQL Server and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.